Exhibit 99.3

Unless the context otherwise requires, “Genworth,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Genworth Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis of our consolidated financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5.

Overview

Our business

We are a leading financial security company dedicated to providing insurance, wealth management, investment and financial solutions to more than 15 million customers, with a presence in more than 25 countries. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2011, we changed our operating business segments to better align our businesses. Under the new structure, we operate through three divisions: Insurance and Wealth Management, Mortgage Insurance and Corporate and Runoff. Under these divisions, there are six operating business segments. The Insurance and Wealth Management Division includes the following operating business segments: U.S. Life Insurance (which includes our life insurance, long-term care insurance and fixed annuities businesses), International Protection (which includes our lifestyle protection insurance business) and Wealth Management. The Mortgage Insurance Division includes the following operating business segments: International Mortgage Insurance and U.S. Mortgage Insurance. The Corporate and Runoff Division includes the Runoff segment and Corporate and Other activities. The Runoff segment includes the results of non-strategic products which are no longer actively sold. These changes allow us to sharpen our focus on common aspects within each group of businesses while taking advantage of current financial synergies. Financial information has been updated for all periods to reflect the reorganized segment reporting structure. The following discussion reflects our reorganized operating segments:

1

We also have Corporate and Other activities which include debt financing expenses that are incurred at our holding company level, unallocated corporate income and expenses, eliminations of inter-segment transactions and the results of other non-core businesses.

Our financial information

The financial information in this Current Report on Form 8-K has been derived from our consolidated financial statements.

Revenues and expenses

Our revenues consist primarily of the following:

2

Our expenses consist primarily of the following:

We allocate corporate expenses to each of our operating segments using a methodology that includes allocated capital.

Management’s discussion and analysis by segment contains selected operating performance measures including “sales,” “assets under management” and “insurance in-force” or “risk in-force” which are commonly used in the insurance and investment industries as measures of operating performance.

Management regularly monitors and reports sales metrics as a measure of volume of new and renewal business generated in a period. Sales refer to: (1) annualized first-year premiums for term life, long-term care and Medicare supplement insurance; (2) new and additional premiums/deposits for universal and term universal life insurance, linked-benefits, fixed and variable products; (3) gross and net flows, which represent gross flows less redemptions, for our wealth management business; (4) written premiums and deposits, gross of ceded reinsurance and cancellations, and premium equivalents, where we earn a fee for administrative services only business, for our lifestyle protection insurance business; and (5) new insurance written for mortgage insurance. Sales do not include renewal premiums on policies or contracts written during prior periods. We consider annualized first-year premiums, new premiums/deposits, gross and net flows, written premiums, premium equivalents and new insurance written to be a measure of our operating performance because they represent a measure of new sales of insurance policies or contracts during a specified period, rather than a measure of our revenues or profitability during that period.

Management regularly monitors and reports assets under management for our wealth management business, insurance in-force and risk in-force. Assets under management for our wealth management business represent third-party assets under management that are not consolidated in our financial statements. Insurance in-force for our life, international mortgage and U.S. mortgage insurance businesses is a measure of the aggregate face value of outstanding insurance policies as of the respective reporting date. For our risk in-force in our international

3

mortgage insurance business, we have computed an “effective” risk in-force amount, which recognizes that the loss on any particular loan will be reduced by the net proceeds received upon sale of the property. Effective risk in-force has been calculated by applying to insurance in-force a factor of 35% that represents our highest expected average per-claim payment for any one underwriting year over the life of our businesses in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Risk in-force for our U.S. mortgage insurance business is our obligation that is limited under contractual terms to the amounts less than 100% of the mortgage loan value. We consider assets under management for our wealth management business, insurance in-force and risk in-force to be a measure of our operating performance because they represent a measure of the size of our business at a specific date which will generate revenues and profits in a future period, rather than a measure of our revenues or profitability during that period.

We also include information related to loss mitigation activities for our U.S. mortgage insurance business. We define loss mitigation activities as rescissions, cancellations, borrower loan modifications, repayment plans, lender- and borrower-titled pre-sales, claims administration and other loan workouts. Estimated savings related to rescissions are the reduction in carried loss reserves, net of premium refunds and reinstatement of prior rescissions. Estimated savings related to loan modifications and other cure related loss mitigation actions represent the reduction in carried loss reserves. For non-cure related actions, including pre-sales, the estimated savings represent the difference between the full claim obligation and the actual amount paid. We believe that this information helps to enhance the understanding of the operating performance of our U.S. mortgage insurance business as loss mitigation activities specifically impact current and future loss reserves and level of claim payments.

These operating measures enable us to compare our operating performance across periods without regard to revenues or profitability related to policies or contracts sold in prior periods or from investments or other sources.

Business trends and conditions

Our business is, and we expect will continue to be, influenced by a number of industry-wide and product specific trends and conditions.

General conditions and trends affecting our businesses

Financial and economic environment. The stability of both the financial markets and global economies in which we operate impacts the sales, revenue growth and profitability trends of our businesses. Equity markets, credit markets and interest rate spreads generally improved during 2011 but experienced higher volatility and widening spreads in the second half of 2011. Although global financial markets experienced some improvement since 2010, the European debt crisis and concerns regarding the U.S. economy impacted the recovery.

The U.S. housing market reflected continuing stress and growing levels of foreclosures with variations in performance by sub-market, including signs of stabilization within certain regions while others declined. Unemployment and underemployment levels in the United States remained relatively constant with the fourth quarter of 2010 and throughout 2011 with a slight decline in December 2011. We expect unemployment and underemployment levels in the United States to stabilize at elevated levels and gradually decrease over time though remain elevated for an extended period. In Canada, the housing market was pressured by a smaller refinance market while home prices remained relatively stable in the market segment we serve and unemployment levels increased slightly from the third quarter of 2011. In Australia, the housing market has remained fairly stable with home prices and unemployment remaining consistent with the third quarter of 2011. Consumers in Australia remained cautious given higher interest rates, higher costs of living, general concerns about the global economy and slow recovery in regions impacted by the recent natural disasters. Europe remained a slow growth environment with lower lending activity and reduced consumer spending, particularly in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy, in part as a result of the European debt crisis and actual or anticipated austerity initiatives. See “—Trends and conditions affecting our segments” below for a discussion regarding the impacts the financial markets and global economies have on our businesses.

4

Slow or varied levels of economic growth, coupled with uncertain financial markets and economic outlooks, changes in government policy, regulatory reforms and other changes in market conditions, influenced, and we believe will continue to influence, investment and spending decisions by consumers and businesses as they adjust their consumption, debt, capital and risk profiles in response to these conditions. These trends change as investor confidence in the markets and the outlook for some consumers and businesses shift. As a result, our sales, revenues and profitability trends of certain insurance and investment products have been and could be further impacted negatively or positively going forward. In particular, factors such as government spending, monetary policies, the volatility and strength of the capital markets, anticipated tax policy changes and the impact of global financial regulation reform will continue to affect economic and business outlooks and consumer behaviors moving forward.

The U.S. government, Federal Reserve and other legislative and regulatory bodies have taken certain actions to support the economy and capital markets, influence interest rates, influence housing markets and mortgage servicing and provide liquidity to promote economic growth. These include various mortgage restructuring programs implemented or under consideration by the GSEs, lenders, servicers and the U.S. government. Outside of the United States, various governments previously took actions to stimulate economies, stabilize financial systems and improve market liquidity. In general, these actions had a positive effect on these countries and their markets; however, there can be no assurance as to the future level of impact these types of actions may have on the economic and financial markets, including levels of volatility. A delayed economic recovery period, a U.S. or global recession or regional or global financial crisis could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We manage our product offerings, investment and asset-liability management strategies to moderate risk especially during periods of strained economic and financial market conditions. In addition, we continue to review our product and distribution management strategies to align with our strengths, profitability targets and risk tolerance. These and other company actions should enhance our competitive position as well as our capital flexibility and liquidity.

Volatility in credit and investment markets. During the fourth quarter of 2011, markets were characterized by volatility due to increased uncertainty regarding the European economy and continuing concern over potential financial disruption emanating from the region, particularly early in the fourth quarter of 2011. Despite steps taken by the European Union and U.S. Federal Reserve to increase liquidity, stabilize bank funding and reduce funding costs for the European peripherals, markets remained skittish. Positive signs in the U.S. economy began to appear, but European contagion fears and year-end risk aversion dampened demand for riskier asset classes, and the continuing flight to quality kept U.S. Treasury yields low. Demand for both high quality corporate bonds and structured products did increase toward the end of the quarter, resulting in some spread tightening, particularly once U.S. domestic data began to beat market expectations, and the correlation to negative sentiment related to Europe’s issues subsided.

We recorded net other-than-temporary impairments of $132 million during 2011, which were lower than 2010 levels and we expect losses to moderate further from prior year levels. Even though certain segments of the marketplace are still experiencing declines in the performance of collateral underlying certain structured securities, impairments of structured securities in our investment portfolio declined further in 2011 from the 2010 levels. However, impairments related to corporate securities increased during 2011 largely as a result of expected restructuring of two private placement debt securities in the third quarter of 2011. Although economic conditions may continue to negatively impact certain investment valuations, the underlying collateral associated with our securities that have not been impaired continues to perform.

Looking ahead, we believe that the current credit environment provides us with opportunities to invest across a variety of asset classes to meet our yield requirements, as well as to continue execution of various risk management disciplines involving further diversification within the investment portfolio. See “—Investments and Derivative Instruments” for additional information on our investment portfolio.

5

Trends and conditions affecting our segments

U.S. Life Insurance

Life insurance. Results of our life insurance business are impacted by sales, mortality, persistency, investment yields, expenses, reinsurance and statutory reserve requirements. Additionally, sales of our products and persistency of our insurance in-force are dependent on competitive product features and pricing, effective distribution and customer service.

Life insurance sales increased during 2011 compared to 2010 from sales of our term universal and universal life insurance products. Sales of our term universal life insurance product were up 16% in 2011 versus the traditional term and term universal life insurance sales in the prior year. Annualized first-year deposits of our universal life insurance products increased 14% in 2011 compared to the prior year. We believe our life insurance products have been effectively priced for the middle and emerging affluent markets as reflected in recent trends. More recently, we have raised certain product prices, chosen not to follow certain competitors’ price reductions and moved to tighten pricing assumptions given the low interest rate environment. Therefore, we expect reduced sales levels in 2012. Shifts in consumer demand, relative pricing, return on capital or reinsurance decisions and other factors could also affect our sales levels.

Throughout 2010 and into 2011, we experienced favorable mortality results in our term life insurance products as compared to priced mortality assumptions. During this same period, while less severe in 2011 than in prior years, we have experienced lower persistency as compared to pricing assumptions for 10-year term life insurance policies as they go through their post-level rate period. We expect this trend in persistency to continue as these 10-year term life insurance policies go through their post-level rate period and then moderate thereafter.

Regulations XXX and AXXX require insurers to establish additional statutory reserves for term life insurance policies with long-term premium guarantees and for certain universal life insurance policies with secondary guarantees. This increases the capital required to write these products. The alternatives available to finance the increased reserve requirements on some of our in-force books of business have over time become limited or more expensive. Despite this, committed funding sources are in place for approximately 95% of our anticipated peak level reserves required under Regulations XXX and AXXX.

In addition, the NAIC has formed a Joint Working Group to review the statutory reserve requirements of Regulation AXXX impacting certain universal life insurance policies with secondary guarantees. While the Joint Working Group has issued a draft conceptual framework for public comment, it is too early to assess the magnitude of the affect the framework would have on reserving requirements, if adopted, or changes to regulatory capital requirements. However, we expect changes to such requirements and this could impact future sales and product design.

Long-term care insurance. Results of our long-term care insurance business are influenced by sales, morbidity, mortality, persistency, investment yields, expenses and reinsurance. Additionally, sales of our products are impacted by the relative competitiveness of our offerings based on product features and pricing, including our ability to implement future rate actions as deemed necessary.

In recent years, industry-wide first-year annualized premiums of long-term care insurance declined during the recession and rebounded as the economy stabilized. This positive trend continued during 2011. Sales of our individual long-term care insurance product increased 45% in 2011 versus the prior year due in part to overall sales growth in the market and to competitor actions. These trends combined with the impacts of the progress made on our multiple growth initiatives relating to distribution effectiveness and broadening of our individual and group offerings have resulted in increased sales. Given these developments, we have increased both pricing and utilization of reinsurance in the form of coinsurance to improve profitability and capacity for new business. We have reinsured through coinsurance 40% of our most recent individual long-term care product offerings. Sales of our individual long-term care insurance products increased in the fourth quarter of 2011 due in part to

6

the recent introduction of a new, higher priced product with the higher pricing catalyzing sales of the prior product. We expect sales to moderate in 2012. We expect our sales levels could be further impacted by shifts in consumer demand, relative pricing, pricing of next generation products, return on capital and reinsurance decisions and other factors. We have experienced, and may continue to experience, higher claims than priced for in older issued policies which negatively impact our results of operations.

We continue pursuing initiatives including: new product issuance and service offerings; investing in care coordination capabilities; refining underwriting requirements; maintaining tight expense management; actively exploring additional reinsurance strategies; executing effective investment strategies; and considering other actions to improve business profitability and the performance of the overall block. These efforts include evaluating the need for future in-force rate increases, where warranted, on older issued policies. In this regard, we began filing for a rate increase of 18% on two blocks of older long-term care insurance policies in November 2010. As of December 31, 2011, we have received approvals in 39 states which represent approximately 65% of the targeted premiums. The state approval process of an in-force rate increase and the amount of the rate increase varies, and in certain states the decision to approve or decline can take up to two years. Upon approval, premium increases may only occur on an insured’s billing anniversary date. Therefore, the benefits of any rate increase may not be fully realized until the implementation is complete.

Changes in regulations or government programs, including long-term care insurance rate action legislation could impact our long-term care insurance business positively or negatively. As such, we continue to actively monitor regulatory developments.

Fixed annuities. Results of our fixed annuities business are affected by investment performance, interest rate levels, slope of the interest rate yield curve, net interest spreads, mortality, policyholder surrenders, new product sales and competitiveness of our offerings. Our competitive position within many of our distribution channels and our ability to grow this business depends on many factors, including product offerings and relative pricing.

In fixed annuities, sales may fluctuate as a result of consumer demand, changes in interest rates, credit spreads, relative pricing, return on capital decisions, and our disciplined approach to managing risk. We have re-priced fixed annuities to maintain or increase spreads and targeted returns. Looking ahead, we will continue to actively evaluate marketing and investment strategies in the event that interest rates change. We have targeted distributors and producers and maintained sales capabilities that align with our focused strategy. We have expanded distribution relationships with new financial institutions, independent financial planners and BGAs and we expect to continue to build these distribution relationships while selectively adding or shifting towards other product offerings, including fixed indexed annuities.

Refinements of product offerings and related pricing, including use of reduced commission structures and disciplined investment strategies, support our target of achieving appropriate risk-adjusted returns. Sales increased in 2011 reflecting the opportunistic use of reduced commission products. In 2012, we expect moderate growth in sales driven by our new fixed indexed annuity products.

International Protection

Growth and performance of our lifestyle protection insurance business is dependent in part on economic conditions, including consumer lending and spending levels, unemployment trends, client account penetration and mortality and morbidity trends. Additionally, the types and mix of our products will vary based on regulatory and consumer acceptance of our products.

The profitability of our lifestyle protection insurance business improved during 2011 driven by lower new claim registrations resulting in lower claim reserves and claim payments, as well as the impact of our policy re-pricing and distribution contract restructuring initiatives. Sales during 2011 decreased primarily as a result of stagnating economies across Europe, which resulted in a decline in consumer lending where most of our

7

insurance coverages attach as banks tightened lending criteria and consumer demand declined. During the second half of 2011, sales declined in Southern Europe, most notably in Italy and Portugal, as our commercial growth initiatives were more than offset by reduced levels of consumer lending. However, these declines were partially offset as a result of signing new clients and increasing production with our large clients during 2011. We are pursuing various targeted initiatives to launch in select new markets such as South America and China, enhance our distribution capabilities and optimize our product offerings, which have begun to help to mitigate lower consumer lending levels. However, depending on the severity and length of these conditions, we could experience additional declines in sales and ability to generate targeted growth in new sales.

New claim registrations continued to decline in 2011 and remain at the lowest levels since the third quarter of 2008. This, combined with stabilizing claim durations, has led to a return to pre-recession loss ratio levels. The improvement in our loss ratio has been most notable in the Nordic and Western Europe regions. Our loss ratio in the fourth quarter of 2011 has remained consistent with the fourth quarter of 2010 and is at a level that we expect going forward.

Consumer lending levels remain challenged particularly given concerns regarding the European debt crisis. Unemployment rates in Europe are expected to trend upwards slightly during 2012 with regional variation, although the impact is expected to be less severe than the previous recession. Additionally, we expect flat to negative European gross domestic product growth.

During 2011, continued progress was made in improving profitability through pricing, coverage or distribution contract changes on both new and eligible in-force policies. With most of these contract restructuring projects complete, we are focusing on supporting sales strategies through expansion into select new markets, targeted product offerings and enhanced distribution capabilities. We expect these efforts, along with sound risk and cost management disciplines, to maintain or improve profitability and help offset the impact of economic or employment pressures as well as lower levels of consumer lending.

Wealth Management

Results of our wealth management business are impacted by the demand for asset management products and related support services, investment performance and equity market conditions.

Although we experienced negative net asset flows in the fourth quarter of 2011, driven primarily by difficult market conditions and the movement of a legacy block of managed accounts, asset flows for the prior nine sequential quarters as well as net flows for 2011 were positive, driven by the introduction of new investment strategies, the expansion of investment solutions and services we offer to our advisors and an increase in the number of advisors that do business with us. We expect additional outflows from the legacy block of managed accounts in the first quarter of 2012 to impact net flows. Depending upon the direction of equity and fixed-income markets in the future, we could see either positive or negative impacts on sales, net flows and assets under management.

On December 31, 2010, we purchased the operating assets of Altegris. This acquisition provided a platform of alternative investments including hedge funds and managed futures products and had approximately $2.2 billion in client assets as of December 31, 2010.

In January 2012, we reached an agreement to sell our tax and accounting financial advisor unit, GFIS, for approximately $79 million at closing, plus an earnout provision. We expect to recognize a realized gain on the sale, with the closing of the sale expected in the first half of 2012, subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals.

8

International Mortgage Insurance

Results of our international mortgage insurance business are affected by changes in regulatory environments, employment levels, consumer borrowing behavior, lender mortgage-related strategies and other economic and housing market influences, including interest rate trends, home price appreciation or depreciation, mortgage origination volume, levels of mortgage delinquencies and movements in foreign currency exchange rates.

Canada and Australia comprise approximately 98% of our international mortgage insurance primary risk in-force with an estimated average effective loan-to-value ratio of 57%. We expect that these established markets will continue to be key drivers of revenues and earnings in our international mortgage insurance business. Our participation or entry in other international markets will remain selective and disciplined.

In Canada, during 2011, favorable economic conditions persisted with housing affordability benefiting from low interest rates and unemployment levels. Since September 2010, the Bank of Canada has maintained the overnight rate at 1.0% and we expect this rate to be maintained at this level through at least the first half of 2012. The unemployment rate in Canada has gradually decreased during the last two years and is expected to remain near current levels throughout 2012. Additionally, home prices increased modestly during the first half of 2011 and remained stable for the remainder of the year. We expect home prices to remain stable through most of 2012 as a balanced housing market persists.

In January 2011, the Canadian government announced new mortgage rules that became effective in March and April of 2011. These changes reduced the amount of flow new insurance written in 2011 primarily due to a smaller market, particularly for high loan-to-value refinance transactions, which was partially offset by improved market penetration. As a result, flow new insurance written in Canada during 2011 was slightly below 2010 levels. We expect our level of flow new insurance written in 2012 to increase modestly from the 2011 levels. As of December 31, 2011, our 2010 and 2011 books of business represent 22% of our insurance in-force while our 2007 and 2008 book years, the two largest in our portfolio, together represent 29% of our insurance in-force. As a result of our large 2007 and 2008 book years and subsequent smaller books seasoning during 2011, earned premiums in Canada declined relative to 2010 levels and are expected to decline modestly in 2012.

During 2011, losses in Canada increased from levels experienced during 2010 despite improving overall economic conditions and stable housing markets. While the total number of delinquencies decreased during 2011, and we continued to realize benefits from our loss mitigation activities, overall losses increased as a result of higher severity on older books, particularly from Alberta. In Alberta, the economy and housing market have not recovered to pre-recession levels, driving increased severity, although conditions did improve during 2011. We expect our overall loss levels in Canada to improve slightly in 2012, although loss levels may vary quarterly based on seasonal or event-driven fluctuations.

In June 2011, the Canadian government passed legislation, that when effective, will formalize existing mortgage insurance arrangements with private mortgage insurers and terminate the existing Government Guarantee Agreement, including the elimination of the Canadian government guarantee fund. This legislation does not change the current government guarantee of 90% provided on mortgages we insure. While we do not anticipate any significant impacts to our business as a result of this legislation, a full assessment of the impact on our business cannot be completed until the regulations are finalized.

In Australia, economic growth slowed during 2011, particularly in Queensland, given the economic impact of the flooding in January 2011, pressures from higher interest rates, higher costs of living, higher exchange rates and cautious consumer spending. As a result, increased levels of new delinquencies were reported by financial institutions in this market, which adversely impacted the results of our operations. The housing market in Australia experienced some modest home price declines in 2011 and we expect home prices to remain near current levels throughout 2012. Unemployment levels increased slightly during 2011 compared to 2010, and we expect a modest increase in 2012. In the fourth quarter of 2011, the Reserve Bank of Australia lowered the cash

9

rate from 4.75% to 4.25%, in two separate decisions, which had remained unchanged since December 2010. There is a market expectation of a further decrease in rates during 2012.

Total mortgage market activity in Australia continued to slow during the first half 2011 as consumers became more cautious about higher interest rates and global economic uncertainty together with the economic impact of natural disasters. Additionally, some lenders were slow to return to the high loan-to-value market. These factors resulted in a smaller high loan-to-value mortgage originations market. During the second half of 2011, total mortgage market activity began to increase driven by first-time home buyers and higher refinance transactions reflecting modestly improving consumer confidence and stable to declining interest rates from rate decreases in the fourth quarter of 2011. As a result, our flow new insurance written decreased marginally overall during 2011 compared to 2010. We expect our level of flow new insurance written in 2012 to be similar to 2011 levels. As of December 31, 2011, our 2010 and 2011 books of business represent 19% of our insurance in-force while our 2007, 2008 and 2009 book years, the three largest in our portfolio, together represent 37% of our insurance in-force. As a result of our large 2007 to 2009 book years and subsequent smaller books seasoning during 2011, earned premiums in Australia declined marginally relative to 2010 levels and this trend is expected to continue in 2012.

Losses in Australia improved throughout most of 2010 as a result of continued loss mitigation activities and the benefits of the improving economic environment. In the first quarter of 2011, losses began to increase driven by higher rates, lower retail spending and higher reserves for claims anticipated from the natural disasters during that quarter, particularly the flooding in Queensland. During the second and third quarters of 2011, there was an increase in the number of outstanding delinquencies and reserves as the cumulative impact of the factors noted previously exerted pressure on elements of the portfolio. During the fourth quarter of 2011, total delinquencies decreased but remained above 2010 levels and the rate of new delinquencies slowed. We expect overall 2012 losses to remain near 2011 levels.

We plan to pursue a sale of a minority interest position of our Australian mortgage insurance business through an IPO in Australia during 2012, subject to market conditions and regulatory approval. This move is part of a broader strategy to rebalance the business portfolio, support future growth opportunities for the Australian business with expanded access to capital markets, maintain control positions of strategic mortgage insurance platforms in Australia and Canada, and together with other actions, free material capital for redeployment.

In many of our European mortgage insurance markets, we have observed early signs of economic stabilization as unemployment rates appear to be peaking and declines in home prices have moderated. The overall economic environment in Europe, however, continues to be dominated by concerns about the fiscal health of the region, which has created uncertainty about the timing and speed of economic recovery. As a result, we have seen increasing delinquencies and lower cures driven by prolonged economic stress, most notably in Ireland, contributing to increased loss reserves in our European mortgage insurance business, which we expect to continue through 2012. Specifically in Ireland, which represents less than 1% of our international primary risk in-force, we experienced increasing delinquencies and reserves in the second half of 2011 driven by prolonged economic and housing market stress and we expect this to continue into 2012.

Over the past several years, our global loss mitigation operations have enhanced both their capabilities and resources devoted to finding solutions that cure delinquencies and help to keep borrowers in their homes. These efforts include loan modification programs designed to help borrowers maintain mortgage payments while they are experiencing personal hardships. These programs allow lenders to maintain their relationship with a borrower while retaining an interest earning asset. In addition, we have developed asset management strategies designed to efficiently dispose of properties when a borrower’s hardship cannot be cured. Such efforts include actively partnering with the lender and borrower to optimize the transition process and taking early possession of properties to mitigate claim payments. As a result, our loss mitigation activities have had a favorable impact on our financial results as well as our relationships in the marketplace.

10

U.S. Mortgage Insurance

Results of our U.S. mortgage insurance business are affected by unemployment, underemployment and other economic and housing market trends, interest rates, home prices, mortgage origination volume mix and practices, the levels and aging of mortgage delinquencies including seasonal variations, the inventory of unsold homes and lender modification efforts. These economic and housing market trends are continuing to be adversely affected by ongoing weakness in the domestic economy and related levels of unemployment and underemployment. This has resulted in several outcomes including rising foreclosures, more borrowers seeking loan modifications and elevated housing inventories which place downward pressure on home values. Overall, we anticipate additional declines in home values into 2012. At the same time, we also expect unemployment and underemployment levels to stabilize at elevated levels and gradually decrease over time though remain elevated for an extended period.

Continuing from the prior year and throughout 2011, a weak housing market, tightened lending standards, the lack of consumer confidence and the lack of liquidity in some mortgage securitization markets, along with volatility in mortgage interest rates, converged to drive a smaller mortgage origination market. Within the private mortgage insurance market, the mortgage insurance penetration rate and overall market size was driven down by growth in FHA originations, associated with multiple pricing, underwriting and loan size factors, and the negative impact of GSE market fees and loan level pricing which made private mortgage insurance solutions less competitive with FHA solutions. However, given ongoing FHA risk management actions, we have seen the private mortgage insurance penetration rate increase through the fourth quarter of 2011 and expect this to continue given the additional FHA pricing changes effective in April 2011. This increase has been mitigated in part by increased GSE loan level fees which can make private mortgage insurance less attractive. Going forward, further GSE fee increases could limit the demand for or competitiveness of private mortgage insurance. Considering both of these trends, we believe the industry can expect to regain market share over time. In November 2011, federal legislation was enacted that extended the authority of the FHA to insure loans with initial balances in amounts up to 125% of median area home prices of up to and including $729,750. With this new legislation in place, the FHA now has higher loan limits than do the GSEs in certain metropolitan statistical areas. Accordingly, this could give the FHA a competitive advantage over private mortgage insurance providers. The mortgage insurance industry level of market penetration and eventual market size will continue to be affected by any actions taken by the GSEs, the FHA or the U.S. government impacting housing or housing finance policy, underwriting standards or related reforms. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 provided for changes to, among other things, the regulatory authority and oversight of the GSEs and the authority of the FHA including with respect to premium pricing, maximum loan limits and down payment requirements. In addition, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac remain the largest purchasers and guarantors of mortgage loans in the United States.

Although the overall insured market size was larger compared to the prior year, our U.S. mortgage insurance market share remained relatively flat in 2011 driven by the shift in private mortgage insurance penetration versus the FHA, changing competitive landscape within the U.S. mortgage insurance industry, including the exit of some competitors from the market and the impact of competitor pricing pressure. While we expect these trends to continue into 2012, we also expect to increase our overall market share in the coming year. Meanwhile, we continue to manage the quality of new business through prudent underwriting guidelines, which we modify from time to time when circumstances warrant. In addition, we regularly monitor competitor pricing and underwriting changes and their potential market impact.

While we continue to experience a decrease in the level of new delinquencies, overall pressure on the housing market continues to adversely affect the performance of our portfolio, particularly our 2005, 2006, 2007 and first half of 2008 book years that we believe peaked in their delinquency development during the first quarter of 2010. Albeit at a lower rate, delinquencies for these book years continue to drive the level of new delinquencies being reported. While the impact was originally concentrated in certain states and alternative product types, during the last few years, the impact has shifted to more traditional products reflecting the

11

elevated unemployment and underemployment levels throughout the United States. Beginning mid-2010, we saw an increase in foreclosure starts as well as an increase in our paid claims as late stage delinquency loans go through foreclosure. In addition, we saw wide ranges in performance among loan servicers regarding the ability to modify loans. While these trends continue, both the levels of foreclosure starts and paid claims declined in the current year from elevated levels seen a year ago. Suspensions and delays of foreclosure actions in response to problems associated with lender and servicer foreclosure process changes and defects have caused, and could further cause, claim payments to be deferred to later periods and potentially have an adverse impact on the timing of a recovery of the U.S. residential mortgage market.

Expanded efforts in the mortgage lending market to modify loans and improved performance of our second half of 2008 and the 2009 and 2010 book years compared with the performance of prior book years, resulted in continued reductions in delinquency levels during the fourth quarter of 2011. However, loan modification efforts remained challenged and aging of delinquencies continued to increase through the remainder of 2010 and through the fourth quarter of 2011; moreover, both foreclosures and liquidations remained elevated through the same period, thereby resulting in ongoing elevated levels of loss reserves and claims. If employment levels remain pressured, home values experience further decline, credit remains tight or interest rates increase, the ability to cure a delinquent loan could be more difficult to achieve. In addition, while we continue to execute on our loan modification strategy, during 2011, we have seen the level of loan modification actions moderating against the levels we experienced during the fourth quarter of 2010. We saw evidence of low levels of modification activity outside of government programs and servicers distracted by various regulatory and legal actions. Further reduction of loan modifications would have an adverse impact on the ability of borrowers to cure a delinquent loan.

Our loss mitigation activities, including those relating to workouts, loan modifications, pre-sales, rescissions, claims administration (including curtailment of claim amounts) and targeted settlements, net of reinstatements, which occurred during the year ended December 31, 2011 resulted in a reduction of expected losses of $567 million compared to $734 million during the year ended December 31, 2010.

Workouts and loan modifications, which related to loans representing 4% of our primary risk in-force as of December 31, 2011, and occurred during the period then ended, resulted in a reduction of expected losses during the year ended December 31, 2011 of $414 million compared to $521 million during the year ended December 31, 2010. Our workout and loan modification programs with various lenders and servicers are designed to help borrowers in default regain current repayment status on their mortgage loans, which ultimately allowed many of these borrowers to remain in their homes. The loans that are subject to workouts and loan modifications that were completed could be subject to potential re-default by the underlying borrower at some future date. However, such borrower re-defaults currently remain stable at anticipated levels. In addition, pre-sales, claims administration and other non-cure workouts that occurred during the year ended December 31, 2011 resulted in a reduction of expected losses of $108 million compared to $55 million that occurred during the year ended December 31, 2010.

As a result of investigation activities on certain insured delinquent loans, we found some levels of misrepresentation and non-compliance with specific terms and conditions of our underlying master insurance policies, as well as fraud. These findings separately resulted in rescission actions that occurred during the year ended December 31, 2011 which reduced our expected losses at the time of rescission by $45 million compared to $158 million that occurred during the year ended December 31, 2010. We expect limited benefit from rescission actions in future periods.

Since 2010, benefits from loss mitigation activities have shifted from rescissions to loan modifications and reviews of loan servicing and claims administration compliance where we expect a majority of our loss mitigation benefits to be achieved going forward. While we expect to continue evaluating compliance of the insured or its loan servicer with respect to its servicing obligations under our master policy for loans insured thereunder and may curtail claim amounts payable based on our evaluations of such compliance, we cannot give

12

assurance on the extent or level at which such claim curtailments will continue. Although loan servicers continue to pursue a wide range of approaches to execute appropriate loan modifications, government-sponsored programs such as Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) continue to decline as alternative programs have begun to gain momentum. With lower benefits from government-sponsored programs and the limited impact from alternative programs to date, we have experienced higher levels of loss reserves and/or paid claims. On February 1, 2012, the Obama Administration announced that it would extend HAMP for one year until December 31, 2013, and expand borrower eligibility by loosening certain underwriting requirements. In addition, incentives paid to the owner of a loan that qualifies for principal reduction under HAMP are being increased and, for the first time, will be offered to the GSEs. There can be no assurance that these changes will increase the number of loans that are modified under HAMP, including mortgage loans we insure currently, or that any such modifications will succeed in avoiding foreclosure. Depending upon the mix of loss mitigation activity, market trends, employment levels in future periods and other general economic impacts which influence the U.S. residential housing market, we could see additional adverse loss reserve development going forward. We expect the primary source of new reserves and losses to come from new delinquencies.

We also participate in reinsurance programs in which we share portions of our premiums associated with flow insurance written on loans originated or purchased by lenders with captive insurance entities of these lenders in exchange for an agreed upon level of loss coverage above a specified attachment point. For the year ended December 31, 2011, we recorded reinsurance recoveries of $101 million where cumulative losses have exceeded the attachment points in captive reinsurance arrangements, primarily related to our 2004 through 2008 book years. We have exhausted certain captive reinsurance tiers for these book years based on loss development trends. Once the captive reinsurance or trust assets are exhausted, we are responsible for additional losses incurred. We have begun to experience constraints on the recognition of captive benefit recovery due to the amount of funds held in certain captive trusts and the exhaustion of captive loss tiers for certain reinsurers. While we continue to receive cash benefit from these captive arrangements at the time of claim payment, this level of benefit is expected to decline going forward as more captive trusts’ assets are being exhausted at a faster rate. As of January 1, 2009, we no longer enter into excess loss of captive reinsurance transactions and, therefore, only participate in quota share reinsurance arrangements. The majority of our excess of loss captive reinsurance arrangements are in runoff with no new books of business being added going forward.

In August 2011, we executed a non-cash intercompany transaction to increase the statutory capital in our U.S. mortgage insurance companies by contributing to those companies a portion of common shares of Genworth Canada that were held by Brookfield, our indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, outside of our U.S. mortgage insurance business, with an estimated market value of $375 million. We continue to hold approximately 57.5% of the outstanding common shares of Genworth Canada on a consolidated basis. In addition, Brookfield has the right, exercisable at its discretion, to purchase for cash these common shares of Genworth Canada from our U.S. mortgage insurance companies at the then-current market price. Brookfield also has a right of first refusal with respect to the transfer of these common shares of Genworth Canada by the U.S. mortgage insurance companies.

GEMICO, our primary U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiary, continues to exceed the maximum risk-to-capital ratio of 25:1 established under North Carolina law and enforced by the NCDOI, which is GEMICO’s domestic insurance regulator. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, GEMICO’s risk-to-capital ratio was approximately 32.9:1 and 23.8:1, respectively. Over at least the next several quarters, we expect GEMICO’s risk-to-capital ratio to continue to increase. The amount of such increases will depend principally on the magnitude of future losses incurred by GEMICO, the effectiveness of ongoing loss mitigation activities and the amount of additional capital that is generated within the business or capital support (if any) that we provide. Our estimate of the amount and timing of future losses is inherently uncertain, requires significant judgment and may change significantly over time.

Effective January 31, 2011, the NCDOI granted GEMICO a revocable two-year waiver of compliance with its risk-to-capital requirement. The waiver, which the NCDOI can modify or terminate at any time in its discretion, gives GEMICO the ability to continue to write new business in North Carolina during the period

13

covered by the waiver, notwithstanding that GEMICO’s risk-to-capital ratio exceeds 25:1. Thirty-four of the states in which GEMICO operates do not impose their own risk-to-capital requirements; consequently, GEMICO is permitted to continue to write business in those states so long as it is permitted to write business in North Carolina. Sixteen states (including North Carolina) impose their own risk-to-capital requirements. Of these 16 states, 12 granted revocable waivers (or the equivalent) of their risk-to-capital requirements to allow GEMICO to continue to write new business, although two such waivers no longer are in effect as of December 31, 2011 due to the imposition of alternative risk-to-capital limitations contained in these two waivers as they were granted to GEMICO. Consequently, GEMICO was authorized to write new business in 44 states as of December 31, 2011.

New insurance written in North Carolina and in the 34 states which do not impose their own risk-to-capital requirements represented approximately 49% of our total new insurance written for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. New insurance written in the other nine states that have granted revocable waivers (or the equivalent) of their risk-to-capital requirements represented approximately 33% and 29%, respectively, of total new insurance written for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.

With respect to the six states where GEMICO is not authorized to write new business, from December 31, 2010 until July 31, 2011 in the case of three of these states (and for a longer period for the fourth state), we wrote new insurance through another of our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries, GRMIC-NC. With the approval of applicable state insurance regulators and the GSEs, after July 31, 2011, we began writing new business through GRMAC in three of these states (and after December 15, 2011, in the two additional states with alternative risk-to-capital waiver limitations) while continuing to use GRMIC-NC to write new business in the sixth state. Freddie Mac’s and Fannie Mae’s approvals of this arrangement expire on July 31, 2012 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

We plan to write new business through GRMAC in any other state that prohibits GEMICO from writing new business, subject to the approval of applicable insurance regulators and the GSEs and GRMAC continuing to satisfy its own regulatory requirements. Depending upon volume, GRMAC currently has approximately a full year of new business capacity. We continue to discuss our ongoing use of these and other alternative arrangements with our state insurance regulators and the GSEs.

Historically, we have actively managed the risk-to-capital ratios of our U.S. mortgage insurance business in various ways, including through reinsurance arrangements with our subsidiaries and by providing additional capital support to our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries (including through the contribution of a portion of our common shares of Genworth Canada). Our existing intercompany reinsurance arrangements are conducted through affiliated insurance subsidiaries, and therefore, remain subject to regulation by state insurance regulators who could decide to limit, or require the termination of, such arrangements. Any decision to provide additional capital to support our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries is subject to a number of considerations, including (i) the extent to which we are on track towards executing certain capital reallocation transactions to support the redeployment of capital for the benefit of our stockholders while maintaining appropriate risk buffers; (ii) our ongoing analyses of risk scenarios and the value and return on providing such capital support or pursuing other alternative arrangements or strategies; (iii) our assessment and understanding of U.S. policy relating to housing finance, the use of private mortgage insurance or the GSEs; and (iv) our assessment of actions by competitors and the current views of the GSEs and state regulators. Depending on the state of the U.S. economy and housing market along with other factors, there is a range of potential additional capital needs that our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries might require, including some that could be substantial. As a result, for a variety of reasons, there is no assurance that we will or will not provide additional capital to support our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries in the future.

For further discussion of the importance of risk-to-capital requirements to our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Our U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiaries are subject to minimum statutory capital requirements and hazardous financial condition standards which, if not met or waived to the extent needed, would result in restrictions or prohibitions on our doing business and may have an adverse impact

14

on our results of operations. Our primary U.S. mortgage insurance subsidiary continues to exceed its minimum statutory capital requirements, and while we have obtained waivers for that insurer to continue to write new business in most states and are using other insurance company subsidiaries to write new business in other states, there can be no assurance that these waivers will continue in effect or that our other insurers will be able to continue to satisfy their own minimum statutory capital requirements over time” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In response to the recent years’ adverse operating results, we engaged in a strategic review of our U.S. mortgage insurance business. While our U.S. mortgage insurance business continues to write new business with expected profitable returns on an ongoing basis, we evaluated (i) the maintenance of ongoing operations and potential changes to the business as the private mortgage insurance and broader housing finance markets evolve; (ii) the prospects involved in ceasing to write new business but continuing to service the existing policies in-force (commonly referred to as “runoff”); and (iii) the merits and potential of entering into a strategic transaction involving the spinoff, merger or sale of our U.S. mortgage insurance operations. Key considerations taken into account by us in identifying and assessing alternatives included the efficiency of capital required in the short- and medium-term under each of these options; underlying embedded value within our U.S. mortgage insurance business; maximization of capital deployment flexibility; maintenance of adequate liquidity and financial flexibility; protection of the value, reputation, ratings and regulatory relationships of our U.S. mortgage insurance business and Genworth as a whole; and maximization of medium- to long-term shareholder value. Each alternative we considered included challenges and opportunities from a financial, operational, reputational and regulatory perspective. We will continue to monitor these considerations and alternatives on a go forward basis and our expectation currently is to continue operating our U.S. mortgage insurance business with the benefit of regulatory waivers and the use of alternative subsidiaries to generate new insurance written.

Runoff

Results of our Runoff segment are affected by investment performance, interest rate levels, net interest spreads, equity market conditions, mortality and policyholder surrenders and scheduled maturities. In addition, the results of our Runoff segment can significantly impact our results, regulatory capital requirements, distributable earnings and liquidity.

In January 2011, we discontinued sales of our individual and group variable annuities; however, we continue to service our existing block of business and accept additional deposits on existing contracts. During 2011, a low interest rate environment and continued volatility in equity market performance unfavorably impacted the results of our variable annuity products and regulatory capital requirements. In the future, equity market performance and volatility could result in additional gains or losses in our variable annuity products although associated hedging activities are expected to mitigate most of these impacts. Volatility in the results of our variable annuity products can result in favorable or unfavorable impacts on capital and earnings. In addition to the use of hedging activities to mitigate impacts related to equity market volatility and interest rate risks, we may pursue reinsurance opportunities to further mitigate volatility in results.

The results of our institutional products are impacted by scheduled maturities, as well as liquidity levels. However, we believe our liquidity planning and our asset-liability management will largely mitigate this risk.

Effective October 1, 2011, we completed the sale of our Medicare supplement insurance business for $276 million. We recognized an after-tax gain on the sale of $36 million in the fourth quarter of 2011. The transaction included the sale of Continental Life Insurance Company of Brentwood, Tennessee and its subsidiary, American Continental Insurance Company, and the reinsurance of the Medicare supplement insurance in-force business written by other Genworth life insurance subsidiaries. See note 8 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for additional information related to the sale.

15

We expect to manage our runoff products for at least the next ten years. Several factors may impact the time period for these products to runoff including the specific policy types, economic conditions and management strategies.

Critical Accounting Estimates

The accounting estimates discussed in this section are those that we consider to be particularly critical to an understanding of our consolidated financial statements because their application places the most significant demands on our ability to judge the effect of inherently uncertain matters on our financial results. For all of these policies, we caution that future events rarely develop exactly as forecasted, and management’s best estimates may require adjustment.

Valuation of fixed maturity securities. Our portfolio of fixed maturity securities is comprised primarily of investment grade securities, which are carried at fair value.

Fair value measurements are based upon observable and unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our view of market assumptions in the absence of observable market information. We utilize valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. All assets carried at fair value are classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:

Estimates of fair values for fixed maturity securities are obtained primarily from industry-standard pricing methodologies utilizing market observable inputs. For our less liquid securities, such as our privately placed securities, we utilize independent market data to employ alternative valuation methods commonly used in the financial services industry to estimate fair value. Based on the market observability of the inputs used in estimating the fair value, the pricing level is assigned.

Security pricing is applied using a hierarchy approach. The vast majority of our fixed maturity securities use Level 2 inputs for the determination of fair value. These fair values are obtained primarily from industry-standard pricing methodologies utilizing market observable information, when available. Because many fixed-income securities do not trade on a daily basis, fair value is determined using industry-standard methodologies by applying available market information through processes such as benchmark curves, benchmarking of like-securities, sector groupings, quotes from market participants and matrix pricing. Observable information is compiled and integrates relevant credit information, perceived market movements and sector news. Additionally, security prices are periodically back-tested to validate and/or refine models as conditions warrant. Market indicators and industry and economic events are also monitored as triggers to obtain additional data. For certain structured securities with limited trading activity, industry-standard pricing methodologies utilize adjusted market information, such as index prices or discounting expected future cash flows, to estimate fair value. These measures are not deemed observable for a particular security and results in the measurement being classified as Level 3.

Where specific market information is unavailable for certain securities, such as privately placed securities, internally developed pricing models produce estimates of fair value primarily utilizing Level 2 inputs along with certain Level 3 inputs. The internally developed models include matrix pricing. The pricing matrix begins with current treasury rates and uses credit spreads received from third-party sources to estimate fair value. The credit spreads incorporate the issuer’s industry or issuer-specific credit characteristics and the security’s time to

16

maturity, if warranted. Remaining un-priced securities are valued using an estimate of fair value based on indicative market prices that include significant unobservable inputs not based on, nor corroborated by, market information, including the utilization of non-binding broker quotes.

See notes 2 and 17 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for additional information related to the valuation of fixed maturity securities.

Other-than-temporary impairments on available-for-sale securities. As of each balance sheet date, we evaluate securities in an unrealized loss position for other-than-temporary impairments. For debt securities, we consider all available information relevant to the collectability of the security, including information about past events, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts, when developing the estimate of cash flows expected to be collected. For equity securities, we recognize an impairment charge in the period in which we determine that the security will not recover to book value within a reasonable period.

On April 1, 2009, we adopted new accounting guidance related to investments that amended the requirement for management to positively assert the ability and intent to hold a debt security to recovery in determining whether an impairment was other-than-temporary and replaced that provision with the assertion that management does not intend to sell or it is not more likely than not that we will be required to sell a security prior to recovery. Prior to the adoption of the new accounting guidance related to investments, management would only authorize the sale of securities not deemed to be other-than-temporarily impaired in response to unforeseen events. If evidence of the conditions or events resulting in our change in intent to hold to recovery was insufficient to prove the events could not have been foreseen, the sale of the security would have been prohibited to ensure consistency with management’s previous assertion of having the intent and ability to hold the security to recovery. Subsequent to the adoption of the new accounting guidance related to investments, management may decide to sell certain securities as a part of our normal portfolio management. See note 2 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for additional information related to other-than-temporary impairments on available-for-sale securities and accounting changes related to other-than-temporary impairments.

Derivatives. We enter into freestanding derivative transactions primarily to manage the risk associated with variability in cash flows or changes in fair values related to our financial assets and liabilities. We also use derivative instruments to hedge certain currency exposures. Additionally, we purchase investment securities, issue certain insurance policies and engage in certain reinsurance contracts that have embedded derivatives. The associated financial statement risk is the volatility in net income which can result from: (i) changes in the fair value of derivatives not qualifying as accounting hedges; (ii) changes in the fair value of embedded derivatives required to be bifurcated from the related host contract; (iii) ineffectiveness of designated hedges; and (iv) counterparty default. Accounting for derivatives is complex, as evidenced by significant authoritative interpretations of the primary accounting standards which continue to evolve. See notes 2 and 5 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for an additional description of derivative instruments and fair value measurements of derivative instruments.

Deferred acquisition costs. DAC represents costs that are related directly to the successful acquisition of new and renewal insurance policies and investment contracts, which are deferred and amortized over the estimated life of the related insurance policies. These costs include commissions in excess of ultimate renewal commissions and for contracts and policies issued some other costs, such as underwriting, medical inspection and issuance expenses. DAC is subsequently amortized to expense over the lives of the underlying contracts, in relation to the anticipated recognition of premiums or gross profits.

The amortization of DAC for traditional long-duration insurance products (including guaranteed renewable term life insurance, life-contingent structured settlements and immediate annuities and long-term care insurance)

17

is determined as a level proportion of premium based on commonly accepted actuarial methods and reasonable assumptions about mortality, morbidity, lapse rates, expenses, and future yield on related investments, established when the contract or policy is issued. U.S. GAAP requires that assumptions for these types of products not be modified (or unlocked) unless recoverability testing deems them to be inadequate. Amortization is adjusted each period to reflect policy lapse or termination rates as compared to anticipated experience. Accordingly, we could experience accelerated amortization of DAC if policies terminate earlier than originally assumed.

Amortization of DAC for annuity contracts without significant mortality risk and for investment and universal life insurance products is based on expected gross profits. Expected gross profits are adjusted quarterly to reflect actual experience to date or for the unlocking of underlying key assumptions based on experience studies such as mortality, withdrawal or lapse rates, investment margin or maintenance expenses. The estimation of expected gross profits is subject to change given the inherent uncertainty as to the underlying key assumptions employed and the long duration of our policy or contract liabilities. Changes in expected gross profits reflecting the unlocking of underlying key assumptions could result in a material increase or decrease in the amortization of DAC depending on the magnitude of the change in underlying assumptions. Significant factors that could result in a material increase or decrease in DAC amortization for these products include material changes in withdrawal or lapse rates, investment spreads or mortality assumptions. For the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, key assumptions were unlocked in our U.S. Life Insurance and Runoff segments to reflect our current expectation of future investment spreads, lapse rates, mortality and reinsurance costs.

The amortization of DAC for mortgage insurance is based on expected gross margins. Expected gross margins, defined as premiums less losses, are set based on assumptions for future persistency and loss development of the business. These assumptions are updated for actual experience to date or as our expectations of future experience are revised based on experience studies. Due to the inherent uncertainties in making assumptions about future events, materially different experience from expected results in persistency or loss development could result in a material increase or decrease to DAC amortization for this business. For the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, key assumptions were unlocked in our international mortgage insurance business to reflect our current expectation of future persistency and loss projections.

The following table sets forth the increase (decrease) on amortization of DAC related to unlocking of underlying key assumptions by segment for the years ended December 31:

The DAC amortization methodology for our variable products (variable annuities and variable universal life insurance) includes a long-term equity market average appreciation assumption of 8.5%. When actual returns vary from the expected 8.5%, we assume a reversion to the expected return over a three-year period. The assumed returns over this reversion to the expected return period are limited to the 85th percentile of historical market performance.

We regularly review DAC to determine if it is recoverable from future income as part of our loss recognition testing. For deposit products, if the current present value of estimated future gross profits is less than the unamortized DAC for a line of business, a charge to income is recorded for additional DAC amortization, and for certain products, an increase in benefit reserves may be required. For other products, if the benefit reserves plus anticipated future premiums and interest income for a line of business are less than the current estimate of future benefits and expenses (including any unamortized DAC), a charge to income is recorded for additional

18

DAC amortization and potentially an increase in benefit reserves, to address any premium deficiency. The establishment of such a reserve is subject to inherent uncertainty and requires significant judgment and estimates to determine the present values of future premium, estimated gross profits and expected losses and expenses of our businesses. As of December 31, 2011, we believe all of our businesses have sufficient future income where the related DAC is recoverable based on our best estimates of morbidity, mortality, expected premiums, claim loss development, withdrawal or lapse rate, maintenance expense or interest rates expected to occur.

Continued low interest rates have impacted the margins on our immediate annuity products. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, we had margin of approximately $60 million and $74 million, respectively, on $7,071 million and $7,374 million, respectively, of net U.S. GAAP liability related to our immediate annuity products. The risks we face include adverse variations in interest rates and/or mortality. Adverse experience in one or both of these risks could result in the DAC associated with our immediate annuity products being no longer fully recoverable as well as the establishment of additional benefit reserves. Any favorable variation would result in additional margin in our DAC loss recognition analysis and would result in higher income recognition over the remaining duration of the in-force block. As of December 31, 2011, we believe all of our other businesses have sufficient future income where the related DAC would be recoverable under adverse variations in morbidity, mortality, claim loss development, withdrawal or lapse rate, maintenance expense or interest rates that could be considered reasonably possible to occur. See notes 2 and 6 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for additional information related to DAC.

Present value of future profits. In conjunction with the acquisition of a block of insurance policies or investment contracts, a portion of the purchase price is assigned to the right to receive future gross profits arising from existing insurance and investment contracts. This intangible asset, called PVFP, represents the actuarially estimated present value of future cash flows from the acquired policies. PVFP is amortized, net of accreted interest, in a manner similar to the amortization of DAC.

We regularly review our assumptions and periodically test PVFP for recoverability in a manner similar to our treatment of DAC. As of December 31, 2011, we believe all of our businesses have sufficient future income where the related PVFP is recoverable based on our best estimates of morbidity, mortality, withdrawal or lapse rate, maintenance expense and interest rates that are expected to occur.

Continued low interest rates and lower than expected termination rates have impacted the margins on our acquired long-term care insurance business. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, we had margin of approximately $11 million and $115 million, respectively, on $2,819 million and $2,857 million, respectively, of net U.S. GAAP liability related to our individual and group long-term care insurance products. The risks we face include adverse variations in morbidity, interest rates, lapse and mortality. Adverse variation in one or more of these risks could result in additional amortization of PVFP or the establishment of additional benefit reserves. As of December 31, 2011, adverse variation that we consider reasonably possible would result in an additional charge to income of up to approximately $46 million. However, more adverse variation could result in additional amortization of PVFP or establishment of additional benefit reserves, while any favorable variation would result in additional margin in our PVFP loss recognition analysis and would result in higher earnings recognition over the remaining duration of the in-force block. As of December 31, 2011, we believe all of our other businesses have sufficient future income where the related PVFP would be recoverable under adverse variations in morbidity, mortality, expected premiums, claim loss development, withdrawal or lapse rate, maintenance expense or interest rates that could be considered reasonably possible to occur. For the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, there were no charges to income as a result of our PVFP recoverability or loss recognition testing. See notes 2 and 7 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for additional information related to PVFP.

Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the amounts paid to acquire a business over the fair value of its net assets at the date of acquisition. Subsequent to acquisition, goodwill could become impaired if the fair value

19

of a reporting unit as a whole were to decline below the value of its individually identifiable assets and liabilities. This may occur for various reasons, including changes in actual or expected income or cash flows of a reporting unit or generation of income by a reporting unit at a lower rate of return than similar businesses.

Under U.S. GAAP, we test the carrying value of goodwill for impairment at least annually at the “reporting unit” level, which is either an operating segment or a business one level below the operating segment. Under certain circumstances, interim impairment tests may be required if events occur or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value.

The determination of fair value for our reporting units is primarily based on an income approach whereby we use discounted cash flows for each reporting unit. When available, and as appropriate, we use market approaches or other valuation techniques to corroborate discounted cash flow results. The discounted cash flow model used for each reporting unit is based on either operating income or statutory distributable income, depending on the reporting unit being valued.

For the operating income model, we determine fair value based on the present value of the most recent income projections for each reporting unit and calculate a terminal value utilizing a terminal growth rate. We primarily utilize the operating income model to determine fair value for all reporting units except for our life and long-term care insurance reporting units. In addition to the operating income model, we also consider the valuation of our Canadian mortgage insurance subsidiary’s publicly traded stock price in determining fair value for that reporting unit. The significant assumptions in the operating income model include: income projections, which are dependent on new business production, customer behavior, operating expenses and market conditions; discount rate; and terminal growth rate.

For the statutory distributable income model, we determine fair value based on the present value of projected statutory net income and changes in required capital to determine distributable income for the respective reporting unit. We utilize the statutory distributable income model to determine fair value for our life and long-term care insurance reporting units. The significant assumptions in the statutory distributable income model include: required capital levels; income projections, which are dependent on mortality or morbidity, new business production growth, new business projection period, policyholder behavior and other specific industry and market conditions; and discount rate.

The cash flows used to determine fair value are dependent on a number of significant assumptions based on our historical experience, our expectations of future performance and expected economic environment. We determine the best estimate of our income projections based on current market conditions as well as our expectation of future market conditions. Our estimates of projected income are subject to change given the inherent uncertainty in predicting future results, which are impacted by the significant assumptions noted above for the respective model used to determine fair value. Additionally, the discount rate used to determine fair value is based on our judgment of the appropriate rate for each reporting unit based on the relative risk associated with the projected cash flows as well as our expectation of the discount rate that would be utilized by a hypothetical market participant.

We consider our market capitalization in assessing the reasonableness of the fair values estimated for our reporting units in connection with our goodwill impairment testing. In 2008, we impaired all goodwill associated with our U.S. mortgage insurance business and annuity and institutional products. Accordingly, these businesses are no longer subject to goodwill impairment testing but do have a significant impact on the valuation of our market capitalization in comparison to our book value. When reconciling to our market capitalization, we estimate the values for these businesses and also consider the negative value that would be associated with corporate debt, which would be subtracted from the fair value of our businesses to calculate the total value attributed to equity holders. We then compare the total value attributed to equity holders to our market capitalization.

20

During the third quarter of 2011, we completed our annual goodwill impairment analysis as of July 1, 2011. As a result of this analysis, we determined fair value was in excess of book value for of our reporting units, except for our long-term care insurance reporting unit discussed further below. While the remaining reporting units had fair values in excess of their respective book values, we noted that our life insurance reporting unit had a fair value that was relatively close to book value and was at greater risk compared to our other reporting units of a future failure.

In our annual goodwill assessment of our life insurance reporting unit, we used our best estimate of the future performance of the business and discounted these projections using a 10.3% discount rate. We determined the discount rate assumption used in our valuation after considering certain external data points from acquisitions/disposals, relevant reinsurance transactions and calculations of the expected weighted-average cost of capital for hypothetical market participants in an acquisition.

As a result of declines in interest rates that increased our life insurance reporting unit’s book value during the third quarter of 2011, we performed an interim impairment assessment on our life insurance reporting unit as of September 30, 2011. Accordingly, we updated the related discount rate analysis and our determination of fair value on the evaluation date. Based on the updated analysis, we utilized a discount rate of 9.0% and noted the decline in the discount rate utilized was primarily the result of a decrease in interest rates during the third quarter of 2011. Based on this interim evaluation as of September 30, 2011, our life insurance reporting unit’s fair value continued to exceed book value by approximately 35% with a goodwill balance of $495 million. There were no events or circumstances during the fourth quarter of 2011 that triggered another interim evaluation of goodwill for our life insurance reporting unit.

Shifts in business strategy or capital allocation as well as deterioration or adverse market conditions for certain businesses could have a significant impact on the fair value of our reporting units and could result in additional future impairments of goodwill.

As part of our annual goodwill impairment testing, we noted that our long-term care insurance reporting unit’s fair value was less than its book value. If fair value is lower than book value, the reporting unit’s fair value is allocated to assets and liabilities as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. If this “implied goodwill” exceeds the reporting unit’s goodwill balance, goodwill is deemed recoverable. Accordingly, we evaluated our long-term care insurance reporting unit’s goodwill balance of $426 million and determined that the amount of implied goodwill was approximately 66% more than the amount of goodwill currently recorded. Accordingly, goodwill was recoverable and not impaired.

The key assumptions that impact our evaluation of goodwill for our long-term care insurance reporting unit under our goodwill impairment assessment primarily relate to the discount rate utilized to determine the present value of the projected cash flows and the valuation of new business. While the valuation of our in-force business for long-term care insurance is included in the fair value of the reporting unit, the in-force value does not contribute significant, incremental value to support goodwill based on a hypothetical acquisition under our goodwill impairment assessment. We determine the appropriate discount rate based on our experience and understanding of common actuarial appraisal methodologies that we believe market participants would also utilize when evaluating similar product lines where there is significant experience for a product and policyholder assumptions (i.e., lapse, mortality and morbidity). The valuation of new business is determined by utilizing several inputs such as expected new business production, both in terms of the quantity and number of years of new production assumed, as well as profitability of the new business, which is primarily dependent on policyholder assumptions, expected investment returns and targeted capital levels.

During the fourth quarter of 2011, as a result of our reorganized operating segments, our reverse mortgage business was newly identified as a separate reporting unit. Previously, this business was a component of the long-term care insurance reporting unit. Due to historical business performance and recent adverse developments within the industry that negatively impacted the valuation of the business, we impaired all of the goodwill related

21

to our reverse mortgage business reported in Corporate and Other activities in the fourth quarter of 2011. The key assumptions utilized in this valuation included expected future business performance and the discount rate, both of which were adversely impacted as a result of the recent industry developments. There were no goodwill impairment charges recorded in 2010 and 2009. Deteriorating or adverse market conditions for certain businesses may have a significant impact on the fair value of our reporting units and could result in future impairments of goodwill.

See notes 2 and 8 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for additional information related to goodwill.

Insurance liabilities and reserves. We calculate and maintain reserves for the estimated future payment of claims to our policyholders and contractholders based on actuarial assumptions and in accordance with industry practice and U.S. GAAP. Many factors can affect these reserves, including economic and social conditions, mortality and morbidity trends, inflation, healthcare costs, changes in doctrines of legal liability and damage awards in litigation. Therefore, the reserves we establish are necessarily based on estimates, assumptions and our analysis of historical experience. Our results depend significantly upon the extent to which our actual claims experience is consistent with the assumptions we used in determining our reserves and pricing our products. Our reserve assumptions and estimates require significant judgment and, therefore, are inherently uncertain. We cannot determine with precision the ultimate amounts that we will pay for actual claims or the timing of those payments.

Insurance reserves differ for long- and short-duration insurance policies. Measurement of long-duration insurance reserves (such as guaranteed renewable term life insurance, annuity and long-term care insurance products) is based on approved actuarial methods, and includes assumptions about expenses, mortality, morbidity, lapse rates and future yield on related investments. For level premium term life insurance products, we floor the liability for future policy benefits on each policy at zero. Short-duration contracts (such as lifestyle protection insurance) are accounted for based on actuarial estimates of the amount of loss inherent in that period’s claims, including losses incurred for which claims have not been reported. Short-duration contract loss estimates rely on actuarial observations of ultimate loss experience for similar historical events.

Estimates of mortgage insurance reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses are based on notices of mortgage loan defaults and estimates of defaults that have been incurred but have not been reported by loan servicers, using assumptions developed based on past experience and our expectation of future development. These assumptions include claim rates for loans in default, the average amount paid for loans that result in a claim and an estimate of the number of loans in our delinquency inventory that will be rescinded or modified (collectively referred to as “loss mitigation actions”) based on the effects that such loss mitigation actions have had on our historical claim frequency rates, including an estimate for reinstatement of previously rescinded coverage. Each of these assumptions is established by management based on historical and expected experience. We have established processes, as well as contractual rights, to ensure we receive timely information from loan servicers to aid us in the establishment of our estimates. In addition, when we have obtained sufficient facts and circumstances through our investigative process, we have the unilateral right under our master policies and at law to rescind coverage ab initio on the underlying loan certificate as if coverage never existed. As is common accounting practice in the mortgage insurance industry and in accordance with U.S. GAAP, loss reserves are not established for future claims on insured loans that are not currently in default.

Management reviews quarterly the loss reserves for adequacy, and if indicated, updates the assumptions used for estimating and calculating such reserves based on actual experience and our historical frequency of claim and severity of loss rates that are applied to the current population of delinquencies. Factors considered in establishing loss reserves include claim frequency patterns (reflecting the loss mitigation actions on such claim patterns), the aged category of the delinquency (i.e., age and progression of delinquency to claim) and loan coverage percentage. The establishment of our mortgage insurance loss reserves is subject to inherent uncertainty and requires judgment by management. The actual amount of the claim payments may vary significantly from

22

the loss reserve estimates. Our estimates could be adversely affected by several factors, including a deterioration of regional or national economic conditions leading to a reduction in borrowers’ income and thus their ability to make mortgage payments, a drop in housing values that could expose us to greater loss on resale of properties obtained through foreclosure proceedings and an adverse change in the effectiveness of loss mitigation actions that could result in an increase in the frequency of expected claim rates. Our estimates are also affected by the extent of fraud and misrepresentation that we uncover in the loans that we have insured and the coverage upon which we have consequently rescinded or may rescind going forward. Our loss reserving methodology includes estimates of the number of loans in our delinquency inventory that will be rescinded or modified, as well as estimates of the number of loans for which coverage may be reinstated under certain conditions following a rescission action.

In considering the potential sensitivity of the factors underlying management’s best estimate of our U.S. and international mortgage insurance reserves for losses, it is possible that even a relatively small change in estimated claim rate (“frequency”) or a relatively small percentage change in estimated claim amount (“severity”) could have a significant impact on reserves and, correspondingly, on results of operations. Based on our actual experience during 2011 in our U.S. mortgage insurance business, a reasonably possible quarterly change could be a 9% change in the average frequency reserve factor, which would change the gross reserve amount for such quarter by approximately $350 million for our U.S. mortgage insurance business. Based on our actual experience during 2011 in our international mortgage insurance business, a reasonably possible quarterly change could be a $1,000 change in the average severity reserve factor combined with a 1% change in the average frequency reserve factor, which would change the gross reserve amount by approximately $27 million for our international mortgage insurance business based on current exchange rates. As these sensitivities are based on our 2011 experience, given the high level of uncertainty in the economic environment, there is a reasonable likelihood that these changes in assumptions could occur in the near term. Adjustments to our reserve estimates are reflected in the consolidated financial statements in the years in which the adjustments are made.

In addition to the sensitivities discussed above, our more recent books of business in both our U.S. and certain international mortgage insurance businesses have experienced higher losses than our previous book years as a result of the global economic environment. In our U.S. mortgage insurance business, our 2005, 2006, 2007 and the first half of 2008 books of business have been experiencing delinquencies and incurred losses substantially higher than those generated from previous book years we have written. Early loss development patterns from these book years indicate that we would expect a higher level of total losses generated. Variations we consider reasonably possible could include an increase of 10% in these expected losses over a three-year period ending December 31, 2014 that would result in a decrease in after-tax operating results of approximately $78 million. Additional adverse variation could result in additional negative impacts while favorable variations would result in improved margins. Regardless of the ultimate loss development pattern on these books, we expect they will continue to generate significant paid and incurred losses for at least the next two years and thus will continue to have a significant adverse impact on our operating results over these same periods.

In our international mortgage insurance business, we anticipate reduced levels of losses as a result of stable housing markets and economies. However, if housing markets and economies do not remain stable and instead deteriorate, we may experience increased losses. Variations we consider reasonably possible to occur could include an increase in projected losses for our international mortgage insurance business of between 15% and 20% over the next year. If changes at these levels were to occur, after-tax operating results could be negatively impacted by approximately $45 million to approximately $55 million over this same period based on current foreign exchange rates and leaving other assumptions constant. The potential for either additional adverse loss development or favorable loss development exists that could further impact our business underwriting margins.

Unearned premiums. In our international mortgage insurance business, the majority of our insurance contracts are single premium. For single premium insurance contracts, we recognize premiums over the policy life in accordance with the expected pattern of risk emergence. We recognize a portion of the revenue in premiums earned in the current period, while the remaining portion is deferred as unearned premiums and earned

23

over time in accordance with the expected pattern of risk emergence. If single premium policies are cancelled and the premium is non-refundable, then the remaining unearned premium related to each cancelled policy is recognized to earned premiums upon notification of the cancellation, if not included in our expected earnings pattern. The expected pattern of risk emergence on which we base premium recognition is inherently judgmental and is based on actuarial analysis of historical and expected experience. Changes in market conditions could cause a decline in mortgage originations, mortgage insurance penetration rates or our market share, all of which could impact new insurance written. For example, a decline in flow new insurance written of $1.0 billion would result in approximately a $4 million reduction in earned premiums in the first full year based on current pricing and expected pattern of risk emergence. However, this decline would be partially offset by the recognition of earned premiums from established unearned premium reserves primarily from the last three years of business.

As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, we had $4.2 billion and $4.5 billion, respectively, of unearned premiums, of which $2.9 billion and $3.1 billion, respectively, related to our international mortgage insurance business. We recognize international mortgage insurance unearned premiums over a period of up to 25 years, most of which are recognized between three and seven years from issue date. The recognition of earned premiums for our international mortgage insurance business involves significant estimates and assumptions as to future loss development and policy cancellations. These assumptions are based on our historical experience and our expectations of future performance, which are highly dependent on assumptions as to long-term macroeconomic conditions including interest rates, home price appreciation and the rate of unemployment. We regularly review our expected pattern of risk emergence and make adjustments based on actual experience and changes in our expectation of future performance with any adjustments reflected in current period income. For the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, increases to earned premiums in our international mortgage insurance business as a result of adjustments made to our expected pattern of risk emergence and policy cancellation assumptions were $46 million, $52 million and $49 million, respectively.

Our expected pattern of risk emergence for our international mortgage insurance business is subject to change given the inherent uncertainty as to the underlying loss development and policy cancellation assumptions and the long duration of our international mortgage insurance policy contracts. Actual experience that is different than expected for loss development or policy cancellations could result in a material increase or decrease in the recognition of earned premiums depending on the magnitude of the difference between actual and assumed experience. Loss development and policy cancellation variations that could be considered reasonably possible to occur in the future could result in an increase in after-tax operating results of up to $84 million or a decrease in operating results of up to $27 million, depending on the magnitude of variation experienced and leaving other assumptions constant. It is important to note that the variation discussed above is not meant to be a best-case or worst-case scenario, and therefore, it is possible that future variation may exceed the amounts discussed above.

In our U.S. mortgage insurance business, the majority of our insurance contracts have recurring premiums. We recognize recurring premiums over the terms of the related insurance policy on a pro-rata basis (i.e., monthly). Changes in market conditions could cause a decline in mortgage originations, mortgage insurance penetration rates and our market share, all of which could impact new insurance written. For example, a decline in flow new insurance written of $1.0 billion would result in approximately a $5 million reduction in earned premiums in the first full year. Likewise, if flow persistency declined on our existing insurance in-force by 10%, earned premiums would decline by approximately $50 million during the first full year, potentially offset by lower reserves due to policies no longer being in-force.

The remaining portion of our unearned premiums relates to our lifestyle protection and long-term care insurance businesses where the underlying assumptions as to risk emergence are not subject to significant uncertainty. Accordingly, changes in underlying assumptions as to premium recognition we consider being reasonably possible for these businesses would not result in a material impact on our results of operations.

Valuation of deferred tax assets. Deferred tax assets represent the tax benefit of future deductible temporary differences and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets are measured using the enacted

24

tax rates expected to be in effect when such benefits are realized if there is no change in tax law. Under U.S. GAAP, we test the value of deferred tax assets for impairment on a quarterly basis at our taxpaying component level within each tax jurisdiction, consistent with our filed tax returns. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance if, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion, or all, of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In determining the need for a valuation allowance, we consider carryback capacity, reversal of existing temporary differences, future taxable income and tax planning strategies. Tax planning strategies are actions that are prudent and feasible, that an entity ordinarily might not take, but would take to prevent an operating loss or tax credit carryforward from expiring unused. The determination of the valuation allowance for our deferred tax assets requires management to make certain judgments and assumptions regarding future operations that are based on our historical experience and our expectations of future performance. Our judgments and assumptions are subject to change given the inherent uncertainty in predicting future performance, which is impacted by such things as policyholder behavior, competitor pricing, new product introductions, and specific industry and market conditions. Tax planning strategies are incorporated into our analysis and assessment. Based on our analysis, we believe it is more likely than not that the results of future operations and the implementation of tax planning strategies will generate sufficient taxable income to enable us to realize the deferred tax assets for which we have not established valuation allowances. Tax planning strategies considered include the restructuring of certain operations, reallocation of investments away from tax-exempt securities and a life/non-life election. These measures would accelerate the use of NOL carryforwards and other deferred tax asset components.

As of December 31, 2011, we have a net deferred tax liability of $838 million with a $234 million valuation allowance related to state and foreign gross deferred tax assets. We have a consolidated gross deferred tax asset of $1,760 million related to NOL carryforwards of $5,048 million as of December 31, 2011, which, if unused, will expire beginning in 2022. Foreign tax credit carryforwards amounted to $120 million as of December 31, 2011, which, if unused, will expire beginning in 2015.

Deferred taxes on permanently reinvested foreign income. We do not record U.S. deferred taxes on foreign income that we do not expect to remit or repatriate to U.S. corporations within our consolidated group. Under U.S. GAAP, we are generally required to record U.S. deferred taxes on the anticipated repatriation of foreign income as the income is recognized for financial reporting purposes. An exception under certain accounting guidance permits us not to record a U.S. deferred tax liability for foreign income that we expect to reinvest in our foreign operations and for which remittance will be postponed indefinitely. If it becomes apparent that some or all undistributed income will be remitted in the foreseeable future, the related deferred taxes are recorded in that period. In determining indefinite reinvestment we regularly evaluate the capital needs of our domestic and foreign operations considering all available information, including operating and capital plans, regulatory capital requirements, parent company financing and cash flow needs, as well as, the applicable tax laws to which our domestic and foreign subsidiaries are subject. Our estimates are based on our historical experience and our expectation of future performance. Our judgments and assumptions are subject to change given the inherent uncertainty in predicting future capital needs, which are impacted by such things as regulatory requirements, policyholder behavior, competitor pricing, new product introductions, and specific industry and market conditions. As of December 31, 2011, U.S. deferred income taxes were not provided on approximately $2,886 million of unremitted foreign income we considered permanently reinvested. Our international businesses held cash and short-term investments of $644 million related to the unremitted earnings of foreign operations considered to be permanently reinvested as of December 31, 2011.

Contingent liabilities. A liability is contingent if the amount is not presently known, but may become known in the future as a result of the occurrence of some uncertain future event. We estimate our contingent liabilities based on management’s estimates about the probability of outcomes and their ability to estimate the range of exposure. Accounting standards require that a liability be recorded if management determines that it is probable that a loss has occurred and the loss can be reasonably estimated. In addition, it must be probable that the loss will be confirmed by some future event. As part of the estimation process, management is required to make assumptions about matters that are by their nature highly uncertain.

25

The assessment of contingent liabilities, including legal and income tax contingencies, involves the use of critical estimates, assumptions and judgments. Management’s estimates are based on their belief that future events will validate the current assumptions regarding the ultimate outcome of these exposures. However, there can be no assurance that future events, such as court decisions or IRS positions, will not differ from management’s assessments. Whenever practicable, management consults with third-party experts (including attorneys, accountants and claims administrators) to assist with the gathering and evaluation of information related to contingent liabilities. Based on internally and/or externally prepared evaluations, management makes a determination whether the potential exposure requires accrual in the consolidated financial statements.

Consolidated Results of Operations

The following is a discussion of our consolidated results of operations and should be read in conjunction with “—Business trends and conditions.” For a discussion of our segment results, see “—Results of Operations and Selected Financial and Operating Performance Measures by Segment.”

The following table sets forth the consolidated results of operations for the periods indicated:

26

2011 compared to 2010

Premiums. Premiums consist primarily of premiums earned on insurance products for life, long-term care and Medicare supplement insurance, single premium immediate annuities and structured settlements with life contingencies, lifestyle protection insurance and mortgage insurance.

Net investment income. Net investment income represents the income earned on our investments.

Net investment gains (losses). Net investment gains (losses) consist primarily of realized gains and losses from the sale or impairment of our investments, unrealized and realized gains and losses from our trading securities and derivative instruments. For further discussion of the change in net investment gains (losses), see the comparison for this line item under “—Investments and Derivative Instruments.”

27

Insurance and investment product fees and other. Insurance and investment product fees and other consist primarily of fees assessed against policyholder and contractholder account values, surrender charges, cost of insurance assessed on universal and term universal life insurance policies, advisory and administration service fees assessed on investment contractholder account values, broker/dealer commission revenues and other fees.

Benefits and other changes in policy reserves. Benefits and other changes in policy reserves consist primarily of benefits paid and reserve activity related to current claims and future policy benefits on insurance and investment products for life, long-term care and Medicare supplement insurance, structured settlements and single premium immediate annuities with life contingencies, lifestyle protection insurance and claim costs incurred related to mortgage insurance products.

28

Interest credited. Interest credited represents interest credited on behalf of policyholder and contractholder general account balances.

Acquisition and operating expenses, net of deferrals. Acquisition and operating expenses, net of deferrals, represent costs and expenses related to the acquisition and ongoing maintenance of insurance and investment contracts, including commissions, policy issuance expenses and other underwriting and general operating costs. These costs and expenses are net of amounts that are capitalized and deferred, which are costs and expenses that are related directly to the successful acquisition of new or renewal insurance policies and investment contracts, such as first-year commissions in excess of ultimate renewal commissions and other policy issuance expenses.

29

Amortization of deferred acquisition costs and intangibles. Amortization of DAC and intangibles consists primarily of the amortization of acquisition costs that are capitalized, PVFP and capitalized software.

Goodwill impairment. Charges for impairment of goodwill are as a result of declines in the fair value of the reporting units. The goodwill impairment charge in the fourth quarter of 2011 related to our reverse mortgage business included in Corporate and Other activities.

Interest expense. Interest expense represents interest related to our borrowings that are incurred at our holding company or subsidiary level and our non-recourse funding obligations and interest expense related to certain reinsurance arrangements being accounted for as deposits.

30

Provision (benefit) for income taxes. The effective tax rate decreased to 8.7% for the year ended December 31, 2011 from 467.9% for the year ended December 31, 2010. The decrease in the effective tax rate was attributable to the release of uncertain tax benefits in the prior year related to our separation from our former parent. The effective tax rate also decreased due to lower pre-tax results in 2010, which increased the relative magnitude of tax provision items. The year ended December 31, 2011 included an increase of $17 million attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates.

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests. Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests represents the portion of equity in a subsidiary attributable to third parties. The year ended December 31, 2011 included an increase of $6 million attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates.

Net income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders. Lower net income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders in 2011 was primarily related to lower tax benefits. For a discussion of each of our segments and Corporate and Other activities, see the “—Results of Operations and Selected Financial and Operating Performance Measures by Segment.” Included in net income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders for the year ended December 31, 2011 was an increase of $44 million, net of taxes, attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates.

2010 compared to 2009

Premiums

31

Net investment income

Net investment gains (losses). For further discussion of the change in net investment gains (losses), see the comparison for this line item under “—Investments and Derivative Instruments.”

32

Insurance and investment product fees and other

Benefits and other changes in policy reserves

Interest credited

33

Acquisition and operating expenses, net of deferrals

Amortization of deferred acquisition costs and intangibles

Interest expense

Benefit for income taxes. The effective tax rate increased to 467.9% for the year ended December 31, 2010 from 48.4% for the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in the effective tax rate was attributable to the release of uncertain tax benefits related to our separation from our former parent, lower taxed foreign income and tax favored investments. The year ended December 31, 2010 included an increase of $22 million attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates.

34

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests. The increase related to the initial public offering of our Canadian mortgage insurance business in July 2009 which reduced our ownership percentage to 57.5%. The year ended December 31, 2010 included an increase of $13 million attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates.

Net income (loss) available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders. Net income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders in 2010 was primarily related to improved investment performance, partially offset by a higher loss in our U.S. mortgage insurance business. For a discussion of each of our segments and Corporate and Other activities, see the “—Results of Operations and Selected Financial and Operating Performance Measures by Segment.” Included in net income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders for the year ended December 31, 2010 was an increase of $33 million, net of taxes, attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates.

Reconciliation of net income (loss) to net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders

Net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 was $129 million, $35 million and $145 million, respectively. We define net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders as income (loss) from continuing operations excluding net income attributable to noncontrolling interests, after-tax net investment gains (losses) and other adjustments and infrequent or unusual non-operating items. We exclude net investment gains (losses) and infrequent or unusual non-operating items because we do not consider them to be related to the operating performance of our segments and Corporate and Other activities. A significant component of our net investment gains (losses) is the result of impairments, the size and timing of which can vary significantly depending on market credit cycles. In addition, the size and timing of other investment gains (losses) are often subject to our discretion and are influenced by market opportunities, as well as asset-liability matching considerations. Infrequent or unusual non-operating items are also excluded from net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders if, in our opinion, they are not indicative of overall operating trends. There were no infrequent or unusual non-operating items excluded from net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders during the periods presented other than a $36 million gain related to the sale of our Medicare supplement insurance business in the fourth quarter of 2011 and a $106 million tax benefit related to separation from our former parent recorded in the first quarter of 2010.

While some of these items may be significant components of net income (loss) available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders in accordance with U.S. GAAP, we believe that net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders, and measures that are derived from or incorporate net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders, are appropriate measures that are useful to investors because they identify the income (loss) attributable to the ongoing operations of the business. However, net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders is not a substitute for net income (loss) available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. In addition, our definition of net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders may differ from the definitions used by other companies.

35

The following table includes a reconciliation of net income (loss) to net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders for the years ended December 31:

Earnings (loss) per share

The following table provides basic and diluted earnings (loss) per common share for the years ended December 31:

Diluted weighted-average shares outstanding for 2011 and 2010 reflect the effects of potentially dilutive securities including stock options, RSUs and other equity-based compensation.

Weighted-average shares outstanding increased reflecting a public offering of 55.2 million shares of our Class A Common Stock in the third quarter of 2009. See note 16 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for a discussion of the exchange offer completed in August 2009 and note 3 for a discussion of the equity offering in September 2009.

36

Results of Operations and Selected Financial and Operating Performance Measures by Segment

Our chief operating decision maker evaluates segment performance and allocates resources on the basis of net operating income (loss) available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders. See note 20 in our consolidated financial statements under “Item 8—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” included in Exhibit 99.5 for a reconciliation of net operating income (loss) available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders of our segments and Corporate and Other activities to net income (loss) available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders.

The following discussions of our segment results of operations should be read in conjunction with the “—Business trends and conditions.”

Insurance and Wealth Management Division

Division results of operations

The following table sets forth the results of operations relating to our Insurance and Wealth Management Division. See below for a discussion by segment.

37

U.S. Life Insurance segment

Segment results of operations

The following table sets forth the results of operations relating to our U.S. Life Insurance segment for the periods indicated:

The following table sets forth net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders for the businesses included in our U.S. Life Insurance segment for the periods indicated:

38

2011 compared to 2010

Net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders

Revenues

Premiums

Net investment income

Net investment gains (losses). For further discussion of the change in net investment gains (losses), see the comparison for this line item under “—Investments and Derivative Instruments.”

39

Insurance and investment product fees and other. The increase is predominately attributable to an increase in our life insurance business from growth of our term universal and universal life insurance products and also included a gain of $48 million from the repurchase of notes secured by our non-recourse funding obligations in 2011.

Benefits and expenses

Benefits and other changes in policy reserves

Interest credited

Acquisition and operating expenses, net of deferrals

40

Amortization of deferred acquisition costs and intangibles

Provision for income taxes. The effective tax rate decreased to 34.7% for the year ended December 31, 2011 from 35.2% for the year ended December 31, 2010. The decrease in the effective tax rate was primarily attributable to changes in uncertain tax positions.

2010 compared to 2009

Net operating income available to Genworth Financial, Inc.’s common stockholders